It's scary how much I agree with you on this topic, but also nice to not feel like I'm going insane here. But this comment brought to mind another asp...
I summed it up here: No, not at all. Interpretation by the performer has always been an integral part of classical music, for instance; improvisation ...
Focusing on a physical art object narrows the scope of the discussion, in my view. All art is physical in some way of course, but poetry and music are...
I don't think you have, and I'm confident in the argument I put forward. It's fine to disagree, but this has gotten ugly, and you continue to confuse ...
Anyone into cooking? On a bit of a health kick, and made kale and tuna salad with walnuts, cherry tomatoes, cheese, shallot, red pepper and white bean...
You continue to obfuscate the various points being made by both of us; you get them out of order. Now I'm spending all my energy here correcting the m...
As I already said, it's a metaphor, so no, that's not correct. I supported the concept by fleshing out what I mean by using the metaphor. I'm speaking...
I'm happy to admit that finding the proper language to express this concept is difficult, and this is leading to confusion, although I get the feeling...
Not only is it possible, it happens every time that you, the viewer, interface with a work. The work only exists in the context of the audience. The a...
It's not nonsensical; what borders on the nonsensical is that you barely even addressed what you quoted, which was a description of the difference bet...
I won't deny it, but I'm grateful to have read it after experiencing the work first. When I saw your painting, I felt an almost mystical sense of movi...
Along with @"Congau", what I'm arguing is that the work should not need qualification from the artist. The reason for this is that it lessens the impa...
This is key to my argument, I failed to touch on this. If this concept of art as it's own language is some high horse pedestal of "purity", then I'm f...
Dropping in at random, been away for awhile. I'm not advocating an elitism expecting everyone to "get it"; I'm not a visual art expert either, I come ...
Like I said, I don't want to get into a debate about what art is; that's not what this thread is about. If we seem to disagree about the definition......
Also fair. "What is art?" There was a whole 20-something page thread about this...I don't want to get mired in another one of those debates, so I'll t...
I mean, sure, there is an "outside" context (the artist, culture, etc), and there is the "point-of-view" context: you. I just spitballed that right no...
What? the work itself was not an embellishment or excess to begin with. When I write a song, I'm writing a song so I remain alive. If you don't unders...
No, you provide the contextual lens through which the work is viewed. I mean, is this really debatable? The context "whatever inspired the artist" is ...
I feel like I say this every other post, but the most important context to a piece of art is you. You provide the context. Not only is there cultural ...
Because art communicates via it's own inherent medium. If you don't understand this, then I don't know what else to tell you, and I'm not trying to in...
That's not a proper argument. Can you elaborate? I gave specific examples; I'd love specific examples of how you disagree in such a polar opposite way...
Can you present an argument in favor of artist statements? Other than the concept of a children's artist statement, which I think is fine for what it ...
I agree that childish wonder is perhaps the best way to experience art, but that exact experience is immediate; the childish wonder of experiencing so...
Surely you are aware of the inanity of what you're saying. If calling for art to be freely experienced by the audience without the imposition by the a...
I'll try again, if I may. I'm not breaking any silence by crying "no artist statements!" I'm interrupting the noise of the artist statements themselve...
Comments